no pipeline, no tankers, no problem 2

1125 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pondering

These quotes clarify his intent even more:

“We have seen it other places, that equivalent of religious zeal leading to flouting of the law in a way that could lead to death … Inevitably, when you get that fanaticism, if you will, you’re going to have trouble,” he said.

“Are we collectively as a society willing to allow the fanatics to obstruct the general will of the population? That then turns out to be a real test of whether we actually do believe in the rule of law.”

If a "fanatic" dies due solely to their own behavior, say explodes a bomb on themselves, there would be no reason to stop enforcing the rule of law. If law enforcement or construction crews have any part in the death damn right it should stop the pipeline until the safety of all people including protesters can be assured. 

There is another very interesting quote in there:

“We have to understand this is a resource where the long-term viability isn’t there, not because we’re running out of muck in the ground, but because we actually, collectively, as the globe, are going to have to stop using as much of this stuff.”

Dodge said that, not a protester. Like every other oil producer they are trying to get a maximum amount of oil out of the ground before the market for oil collapses at which point there will be no money left to clean up the mess. 

quizzical

if some people are going to start thinking it's all good to kill protesters who are protesting against something "legal" then when are they going to start killing anti-abortion protestets?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Coldwater Indian Band alleges someone 'tampered' with Kinder Morgan report

The Coldwater Indian Band alleges that someone tampered with evidence submitted by Kinder Morgan to Canada’s pipeline regulator to avoid a costly route change on the company's Trans Mountain expansion project.

The Texas-based energy company has proposed to install the new oil pipeline near an aquifer that provides drinking water for the First Nation in the central interior region of British Columbia.

While the company submitted a geophysical report to support its proposed route, the First Nation said the company used "false or misleading" evidence in route hearings that should be "disregarded" by the federal pipeline regulator, the National Energy Board (NEB). The regulator must make a decision on the final route before the project can proceed after its hearings conclude.

Lawyers for Coldwater made the dramatic allegation about the "tampering" on June 12 in a legal submission sent to the NEB. They said in the submission that they had discovered more than two dozen alterations to a report about the aquifer that was stamped by professional geologists and used by the Texas energy giant’s Canadian unit, Trans Mountain, in ongoing route hearings.

The lawyers said they noticed the differences after Kinder Morgan gave them a "draft" version of a document — called the "Frontier Report" — in June 2017, and compared it with the one that was recently submitted to the NEB on April 20, 2018 as part of the route hearings.

“It is evident that the Frontier Report has been tampered with in some respect,” said a June 14 letter to the NEB from lawyer F. Matthew Kirchner. “It seems unlikely that it was altered by the authors of the report as that would appear to contravene the professional guidelines (for professional geologists and engineers)… Regardless, it is clear that the document that is now in evidence is different than the document that was signed and sealed on May 23, 2017.”

Kirchner's letter also noted that the signatures, seals and dates on both versions of the report were identical, despite the alterations. Government guidelines require new seals to be added if a document is changed to certify that it hasn't been modified or tampered with in any way.

quote:

'The water that's there feeds over 90 per cent of our community'

The Coldwater Indian Band is also part of a court case that is challenging the federal government's approval of the project. The band's existing proposal for a route change could drive up costs for the project that is already estimated as at least $7.4 billion and rising.

In an interview with National Observer, Coldwater Chief Lee Spahan said the new evidence puts the company's integrity on the line. He said the company appears to be trying to take the cheapest route through his nation's territory, instead of the safest one.

"They’re trying to get anything done to make sure it goes through their proposed route which we don’t want," he said.

The nation has fewer than than 1,000 members, including 344 who lived on one of its two reserves in 2013, the band says on its website. The aquifer is critical to their health and well-being, Spahan explained.

“The water that’s there feeds over 90 per cent of our community and that’s our only source of drinking water," he said. "Our backup system is our fire truck and that’s not really a backup system because our fire truck is small, and that wouldn’t even satisfy the community... Our groundwater from wells is our only source of water and that’s a huge concern for us."

The NEB responded to their allegation on June 14. The regulator requested a detailed submission from Coldwater before June 20, asking the band to outline the specific alterations spotted in the report.

Trans Mountain would then have five days to respond, before allowing a final reply from Coldwater on June 27.

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is saying that he wants to implement UNDRIP (United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples) — he wants to stop the boiling water advisories (by March 2021) for First Nations, yet he doesn't look at the impact on our aquifer when the proposed pipeline goes right through our aquifer," Spahan said.

He also also invited the prime minister to visit Coldwater, noting that Trudeau had recently paid a visit to B.C. to meet with chiefs who support the Trans Mountain expansion project.

"He takes the time out of his schedule to attend a meeting with the chiefs that support the pipeline and yet he won't take the time to come to Coldwater and listen to myself, my council and my membership about our concerns and our issues," Spahan said.

Pondering

Wouldn't altering the report be a crime? 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..hypocritical isn't it? this going on while they are arresting resistors.

..from the piece

quote:

The allegation also follows admissions from Trans Mountain and the federal Fisheries and Oceans Department that the company had repeatedly violated an environmental law during recent construction work near an oil terminal in Burnaby, in metro Vancouver, as part of the expansion project.

NDPP

Is This the Next Standing Rock? (and vid)

https://twitter.com/KanahusFreedom/status/1006970686148001792

"This is the most important argument in BC. This is not their land."

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..from thursday

Students around Kamloops did a banner drop this morning to oppose their opposition against Kinder Morgan.

Martin N.

quizzical wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

quizzical wrote:

Unionist wrote:

quizzical wrote:

goes well beyond creep. sociopath imv.

labeling people as fanatics to be offed to accomodate corporate greed is beyond creepy.

Agreed. What kind of scum-sucking shit is this Dodge? Enforce the fucking laws even if it means protesters dying? He should be locked up and the key thrown away. And because I oppose capital punishment, I heartily wish him a speedy natural death.

i think his comments are borderline promotion of hate speech, if not over the line.

Dodge isn't speaking of "protesters", he is speaking about the core fanatics that may advocate violence as a means to their goals. If lawbreakers escalate conflict to the point that public safety is threatened, including the safety of legitimate protesters, then the authorities must respond with measures appropriate to the threat. Hysterical passive/aggressive death threats over an opinion are symptomatic of lunacy, not logic.

Escalation is quoted as a legitimate option to pressure government. The rationale is that politicians will cave if too many protesters are arrested. It's a powerful option and legal. Escalating violence to provoke a violent response, hopefully an over response for the cameras is not.

you sir are mentally and emotionally bankrupt.

thankfully most Canadians do not have the same empty belief patterns as you.

Yeah, well, there is no room left at the pinnacle of empty moral smugness. I prefer realism to fanaticism in any regard. Idiots like you are part of the problem, not the solution.

quizzical

Martin N. wrote:

quizzical wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

quizzical wrote:

Unionist wrote:

quizzical wrote:

goes well beyond creep. sociopath imv.

labeling people as fanatics to be offed to accomodate corporate greed is beyond creepy.

Agreed. What kind of scum-sucking shit is this Dodge? Enforce the fucking laws even if it means protesters dying? He should be locked up and the key thrown away. And because I oppose capital punishment, I heartily wish him a speedy natural death.

i think his comments are borderline promotion of hate speech, if not over the line.

Dodge isn't speaking of "protesters", he is speaking about the core fanatics that may advocate violence as a means to their goals. If lawbreakers escalate conflict to the point that public safety is threatened, including the safety of legitimate protesters, then the authorities must respond with measures appropriate to the threat. Hysterical passive/aggressive death threats over an opinion are symptomatic of lunacy, not logic.

Escalation is quoted as a legitimate option to pressure government. The rationale is that politicians will cave if too many protesters are arrested. It's a powerful option and legal. Escalating violence to provoke a violent response, hopefully an over response for the cameras is not.

you sir are mentally and emotionally bankrupt.

thankfully most Canadians do not have the same empty belief patterns as you.

Yeah, well, there is no room left at the pinnacle of empty moral smugness. I prefer realism to fanaticism in any regard. Idiots like you are part of the problem, not the solution.

you have no idea my stance on the pipeline or if i am a fanatic at all.

my position here you have taken exception to is about david dodge's comment about protesters dying and how we need to accept that.

aint nothing fanatical about rejecting state violence against the people who pay their wages.

Martin N.

quizzical wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

quizzical wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

quizzical wrote:

Unionist wrote:

quizzical wrote:

goes well beyond creep. sociopath imv.

labeling people as fanatics to be offed to accomodate corporate greed is beyond creepy.

Agreed. What kind of scum-sucking shit is this Dodge? Enforce the fucking laws even if it means protesters dying? He should be locked up and the key thrown away. And because I oppose capital punishment, I heartily wish him a speedy natural death.

i think his comments are borderline promotion of hate speech, if not over the line.

Dodge isn't speaking of "protesters", he is speaking about the core fanatics that may advocate violence as a means to their goals. If lawbreakers escalate conflict to the point that public safety is threatened, including the safety of legitimate protesters, then the authorities must respond with measures appropriate to the threat. Hysterical passive/aggressive death threats over an opinion are symptomatic of lunacy, not logic.

Escalation is quoted as a legitimate option to pressure government. The rationale is that politicians will cave if too many protesters are arrested. It's a powerful option and legal. Escalating violence to provoke a violent response, hopefully an over response for the cameras is not.

you sir are mentally and emotionally bankrupt.

thankfully most Canadians do not have the same empty belief patterns as you.

Yeah, well, there is no room left at the pinnacle of empty moral smugness. I prefer realism to fanaticism in any regard. Idiots like you are part of the problem, not the solution.

you have no idea my stance on the pipeline or if i am a fanatic at all. Well, the same parameters didn't hinder you in declaring me "emotionally bankrupt".  

my position here you have taken exception to is about david dodge's comment about protesters dying and how we need to accept that. You don't need to accept that if you take his remarks in context.

aint nothing fanatical about rejecting state violence against the people who pay their wages. If there is no provocation, there will be no response. Peaceful protest is self-explanatory.

 

Martin N.

quizzical wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

quizzical wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

quizzical wrote:

Unionist wrote:

quizzical wrote:

goes well beyond creep. sociopath imv.

labeling people as fanatics to be offed to accomodate corporate greed is beyond creepy.

Agreed. What kind of scum-sucking shit is this Dodge? Enforce the fucking laws even if it means protesters dying? He should be locked up and the key thrown away. And because I oppose capital punishment, I heartily wish him a speedy natural death.

i think his comments are borderline promotion of hate speech, if not over the line.

Dodge isn't speaking of "protesters", he is speaking about the core fanatics that may advocate violence as a means to their goals. If lawbreakers escalate conflict to the point that public safety is threatened, including the safety of legitimate protesters, then the authorities must respond with measures appropriate to the threat. Hysterical passive/aggressive death threats over an opinion are symptomatic of lunacy, not logic.

Escalation is quoted as a legitimate option to pressure government. The rationale is that politicians will cave if too many protesters are arrested. It's a powerful option and legal. Escalating violence to provoke a violent response, hopefully an over response for the cameras is not.

you sir are mentally and emotionally bankrupt.

thankfully most Canadians do not have the same empty belief patterns as you.

Yeah, well, there is no room left at the pinnacle of empty moral smugness. I prefer realism to fanaticism in any regard. Idiots like you are part of the problem, not the solution.

you have no idea my stance on the pipeline or if i am a fanatic at all. Well, the same parameters didn't hinder you in declaring me "emotionally bankrupt".  

my position here you have taken exception to is about david dodge's comment about protesters dying and how we need to accept that. You don't need to accept that if you take his remarks in context.

aint nothing fanatical about rejecting state violence against the people who pay their wages. If there is no provocation, there will be no response. Peaceful protest is self-explanatory.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Martin N. wrote:

If there is no provocation, there will be no response. Peaceful protest is self-explanatory.

Don't worry be happy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-diB65scQU

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/quebec-police-admit-they-went-undercover-a...

NDPP

On Secwepemc Territory, provocations by police and the settler-state against protesters have a long history: Here's one. And a BC NDP government in power then too...

"We must clean them out entirely and not leave any hanging issues such as occurred at Oka...It will require the killing of the hardliners."  - Gustafsen Lake, RCMP disclosures, 1995

http://sisis.nativeweb.org/gustlake/sep26cli.html

https://www.uleth.ca/dspace/handle/10133/189

quizzical

emotionally bankrupt as i said.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

The governments often uses force to enforce the law, after all what would happen if we didn't?

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..nice krop! enough resistance can make it reality.

Martin N.

Ah! The opponent has power therefore the righteous have justice. Nice non sequitur and the graphics do lend legitimacy.

The law is what differentiates a civil society from a survivalist one. Challenging bad laws and holding scofflaws to account is democracy. So is speaking truth to power. Flouting laws you don't like and choosing to ignore lawful authority leads to anarchy, which is the optimal environment for the shirttail clingons  of failed ideologies to thrive.

Pondering

Martin N. wrote:

Ah! The opponent has power therefore the righteous have justice. Nice non sequitur and the graphics do lend legitimacy.

The law is what differentiates a civil society from a survivalist one. Challenging bad laws and holding scofflaws to account is democracy. So is speaking truth to power. Flouting laws you don't like and choosing to ignore lawful authority leads to anarchy, which is the optimal environment for the shirttail clingons  of failed ideologies to thrive.

So slaves should have bided their time rather than trying to escape? It seems to me it is the government and Kinder Morgan that have been breaking laws and it does undermine democracy. 

Martin N.

Pondering wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

Ah! The opponent has power therefore the righteous have justice. Nice non sequitur and the graphics do lend legitimacy.

The law is what differentiates a civil society from a survivalist one. Challenging bad laws and holding scofflaws to account is democracy. So is speaking truth to power. Flouting laws you don't like and choosing to ignore lawful authority leads to anarchy, which is the optimal environment for the shirttail clingons  of failed ideologies to thrive.

So slaves should have bided their time rather than trying to escape? It seems to me it is the government and Kinder Morgan that have been breaking laws and it does undermine democracy. 

 

The slavery issue is a non sequitur that attempts to legitimise your disingenuous argument. Kindly explain what laws the government or KM have broken and how their many opponents have not capitalized on such lawbreaking, mediawise?

Not to lecture or mansplain but making stuff up does not count. Copy and paste of dodgy sites ditto. Is it a generational thingy that individuals have such a wide scope of what the law consists of? Or is it the tentative grasp NGOs have on evidence to support their wild claims of societal malfeasance but a solid grasp on media manipulation that make citizens doubt the sincerity of the law ?

Note: I do not refer to justice or rights or social license or any other term used to obfuscate the law and meld it into an agenda. The law.

quizzical
quizzical
NDPP

First of 202 Trans Mountain Pipeline Protesters Await Sentencing

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/first-of-202-trans-mount...

"...In all about 202 protesters were arrested at Kinder Morgan's worksite on Burnaby mountain. Those who were arrested after May 8 are facing fines up to $5,000 or 14 days in jail.

Legal support co-ordinator Kris Hermes says no protesters have been arrested since the Crown raised the sentencing recommendation to seven days in jail for anyone arrested after May 28 even if they plead guilty before trial. 'The Crown is clearly escalating its attack on anyone protesting at the site and it has had an effect of eliminating protests outside the Kinder Morgan worksite,' said Hermes."

My goodness...is that all it takes? 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Martin N. wrote:

The slavery issue is a non sequitur that attempts to legitimise your disingenuous argument. Kindly explain what laws the government or KM have broken and how their many opponents have not capitalized on such lawbreaking, mediawise?

The point of the fine graphic that krop posted, since it seems to have gone right over your head, is that many of the great injustices of history have been totally legal, just as you insist KM is. They were nonetheless wicked, and to be opposed by all people of good will. Christians insist that the ultimate morality is to be found in the bible, but as a secular humanist, I think it comes from our highly evolved sense of empathy. When an individual's conscience differs from the law, I believe that conscience must rule, not law.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..it wasn't that long ago that postal workers, along with the rest of the federal civil service, didn't have the right to free collective barganing. they didn't have the right to strike. that was the law that said so.

..so postal workers went on wildcat strikes anyway..in montreal, toronto, vancouver and a few other places. and then the law changed. not only for the postal workers but for all of the civil service.

..the last strike i participated while i worked in the po was back in the late 80'. the cons were in power and mulroney was prime minister. they were determined to break cupw. they spent millions bringing in strike breakers that threatened people. phones were bugged by the rcmp. workers were followed home and spied on through their windows. police used violence to break up the picket lines.

..but they never broke the strike. they never broke the solidarity. and in the end they passed back to work legislation fitted with enormous fines for any individual who defied  the order. and even greater fines for the locals and national office should they defy. and everybody knew the cons had failed. 

..just like harper failed re the pipelines. just like trudeau and notley will. today the resistance is as solid as the posties were. even more so as this struggle is led by indigenous peoples and the resistance is incredibly wide and diverse.

Martin N.

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

The slavery issue is a non sequitur that attempts to legitimise your disingenuous argument. Kindly explain what laws the government or KM have broken and how their many opponents have not capitalized on such lawbreaking, mediawise?

The point of the fine graphic that krop posted, since it seems to have gone right over your head, is that many of the great injustices of history have been totally legal, just as you insist KM is. They were nonetheless wicked, and to be opposed by all people of good will. Christians insist that the ultimate morality is to be found in the bible, but as a secular humanist, I think it comes from our highly evolved sense of empathy. When an individual's conscience differs from the law, I believe that conscience must rule, not law.

No, it didn't go over my head. I chose to look behind the curtain, rather than accept it at face value. I think it is an excellent example of pr targeting conformation bias.

I don't disagree with the rest of your post and fully agree with conscience ruling over bad law but where does one draw the line at obeying the law? 

Working within the law to change laws one's conscience cannot accept via legal protest is acceptable to me but breaking laws against others (violence, hooliganism, criminal trespass) to protest the law is not acceptable in a democratic society.

my basic point is that one cannot choose which laws one chooses to obey but can choose which laws to support or protest.

quizzical

[quote=Martin N

 

 

 

 

 

my basic point is that one cannot choose which laws one chooses to obey but can choose which laws to support or protest.

sure one can. especially if law use is being used against people and in a new way benefitting dishonest corporations

voice of the damned

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Martin N. wrote:

The slavery issue is a non sequitur that attempts to legitimise your disingenuous argument. Kindly explain what laws the government or KM have broken and how their many opponents have not capitalized on such lawbreaking, mediawise?

The point of the fine graphic that krop posted, since it seems to have gone right over your head, is that many of the great injustices of history have been totally legal, just as you insist KM is. They were nonetheless wicked, and to be opposed by all people of good will. Christians insist that the ultimate morality is to be found in the bible, but as a secular humanist, I think it comes from our highly evolved sense of empathy. When an individual's conscience differs from the law, I believe that conscience must rule, not law.

Sure. But the law still retains the perogative to act against the lawbreaker. Otherwise, we'd have to let people who violate the no-protest bubble zones around abortion clinics go unpunished, because they were acting according to their individual conscience.

And yes, I'm well aware that the flip side of this is that some lawbreakers whose actions I personally support will get sent to jail.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

voice of the damned wrote:

Sure. But the law still retains the perogative to act against the lawbreaker. Otherwise, we'd have to let people who violate the no-protest bubble zones around abortion clinics go unpunished, because they were acting according to their individual conscience.

And yes, I'm well aware that the flip side of this is that some lawbreakers whose actions I personally support will get sent to jail.

Indeed. Those whose conscience dictates that they commit civil disobedience must be prepared to accept the consequences. Even a bad law is still a law, and will probably be enforced.

NDPP

No surprise either, that the settler population and its governents, conveniently forget that the pipeline is proceeding as a result of a monstrous criminal fraud that the non-Indigenous authorities have jurisdiction to construct a pipeline across unceded Indigenous territories. They don't. And anyone arrested for 'interfering' with the 'lawful contractual rights' of the Transmountain pipeline should be telling the usurping BC courts, first and foremost, that they have no jursidiction to try anyone. It is those courts and judges that are 'in criminal contempt' of the law, not the protestors.

Canadian Criminal Court Jurisdiction Relative to Unceded Indian Territory   

https://dissidentvoice.org/2017/10/canadian-criminal-court-jurisdiction-...

" 9. The burden of proof is always on the Crown from the outset, to prove the land has been 'ceded to, or purchased by Us,' in the absence of which proof the land irrebuttably is presumed still to be 'reserved for them, or any of them,' without regard to which Nation or Tribe comes forward to claim standing to sue and, in the result, the land constitutionally can not be granted and occupied failing discharge of that burden of proof.

That is, the Crown cannot evade the reserved status of the land, so as to disprove of and occupy reserved land as if there had been a cession or purchase, if it can not prove the cession or purchase...The political consequence is that the yet unceded and unpurchased Indian territories have a substantial population of settlers squatting on Indian land, contrary to the express and explicit injunction against that practice..."

This  conversation about 'the law' in Canada and especially in BC where it has been defrauded and trashed is completely outrageous and ridiculous. There is no law operating here. Only fraud and force majeure and an elderly white man in a high backed chair in a Vancouver court room pretending he is a judge and everyone else going along with it.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Martin N.

NDPP wrote:

No surprise either, that the settler population and its governents, conveniently forget that the pipeline is proceeding as a result of a monstrous criminal fraud that the non-Indigenous authorities have jurisdiction to construct a pipeline across unceded Indigenous territories. They don't. And anyone arrested for 'interfering' with the 'lawful contractual rights' of the Transmountain pipeline should be telling the usurping BC courts, first and foremost, that they have no jursidiction to try anyone. It is those courts and judges that are 'in criminal contempt' of the law, not the protestors.

Canadian Criminal Court Jurisdiction Relative to Unceded Indian Territory   

https://dissidentvoice.org/2017/10/canadian-criminal-court-jurisdiction-...

" 9. The burden of proof is always on the Crown from the outset, to prove the land has been 'ceded to, or purchased by Us,' in the absence of which proof the land irrebuttably is presumed still to be 'reserved for them, or any of them,' without regard to which Nation or Tribe comes forward to claim standing to sue and, in the result, the land constitutionally can not be granted and occupied failing discharge of that burden of proof.

That is, the Crown cannot evade the reserved status of the land, so as to disprove of and occupy reserved land as if there had been a cession or purchase, if it can not prove the cession or purchase...The political consequence is that the yet unceded and unpurchased Indian territories have a substantial population of settlers squatting on Indian land, contrary to the express and explicit injunction against that practice..."

This  conversation about 'the law' in Canada and especially in BC where it has been defrauded and trashed is completely outrageous and ridiculous. There is no law operating here. Only fraud and force majeure and an elderly white man in a high backed chair in a Vancouver court room pretending he is a judge and everyone else going along with it.

When the elderly white man finds you guilty, You need to speak your conscience and tell him what you just told us. Tell him he's a fraud and outrageous.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..no one on this board is doing anything illegal. so that's not the context it is being used..in this thread. legal is being used to discredit some people (the resistance) even up to the point of killing them. the hypocrisy in this is how km and the governments operate or have operated in the past, now and into the future. and how it's not so easy to hold them to account as can be done with the dissenters. the hypocrisy is in the power imbalance when suggesting that we all should obey the law.

..this not is a primary issue for those involved on the ground but a tactical one used in debate to divide and conquer. to engage in endless attack about. to try and make people feel bad about the making of collective decisions about their communities well being. imho this can be ignore.    

NDPP

Martin: I did exactly that. What I did not do was say I was standing for Indigenous people and their rights, then recognize the jurisdiction of the colonizer courts to rule over their lands. The bench and bar are part of a clear and well documented conspiracy to evade existing constitutional and international  law which protects and defends Indigenous rights and no lawyer in BC will argue that despite its truth. The link posted @1032 will allow anyone who wishes,  to make a preliminary objection to the BC Court's exercise of jurisdiction on the correct grounds it hasn't any.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Purchases, permits and route hearings may stall Trans Mountain pipeline for years, say legal experts

quote:

Roadblocks include the 157 conditions that need to be satisfied to obtain permits, community hearings to approve a safe route and handling roughly 40 pre-construction conditions still under review — a dozen of which apply to the Burnaby terminal, which is slated for construction within a week, states a news release from route communities and West Coast Environmental Law.

The collaborative analytical document is set for release on Monday.

Community representatives and legal experts are concerned that the federal government — which announced last month that it will buy the Trans Mountain pipeline from Kinder Morgan for $4.5 billion — may bypass the process and impose a route. They are calling on Ottawa to uphold its commitment to the National Energy Board (NEB) process to ensure the project’s safety.

Chilliwack resident Ian Stephen, who participated in NEB hearings in his community, said the current proposed route cuts through the city’s lone supply of drinking water, enters two of the region’s most significant salmon habitats and moves across an elementary school while creeping as close as eight metres to homes.

“Prime Minister (Justin) Trudeau has repeatedly said he wouldn’t have approved the pipeline if it wasn’t safe and that communities grant permission,” Stephen said. “It will be interesting to see if our own government opposes community efforts to move the pipeline to a safer route or imposes a route that has not been deemed safe.”

Chilliwack route hearings aren’t scheduled to end until October.

As of April, nearly 66 per cent of the detailed route was approved by the NEB, according to its website, which states that prior to beginning construction, the builders must satisfy all applicable conditions.

Meanwhile, there are other significant delays.

The Stk’emlupsemc te Secwepemc of the Secwepemc Nation have proposed two possible re-routes. The shorter one is expected to take two years to build and the longer option up to four years.

In Burnaby, a hearing to move an old pipe into a tunnel must be completed by Sept. 21 before the NEB can deliberate and make a decision.

And there’s the Coldwater Indian Band request for an alternative route that would steer clear of an aquifer for drinking water, which is awaiting a decision from the NEB, according to the release. The National Observer recently reported that the First Nation has alleged that Kinder Morgan submitted evidence that was tampered with to avoid the costly route change. A resolution is expected in early July.

The allegation comes on the heels of admissions from both Trans Mountain and the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) that the company repeatedly violated environmental laws during recent construction work in Burnaby.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

70-year-old grandmother faces a week in jail for blockading Kinder Morgan tanker terminal

Yesterday, Laurie Embree, a 70-year-old grandmother dressed in a broad-brimmed sunhat and floral cotton summer shirt, sat in the blazing sun blocking the gates of Kinder Morgan’s Westridge oil terminal, before being arrested by the RCMP. She smiled sheepishly and shrugged off the crowd’s applause as she was led away and returned forty-five minutes later, having been processed at a nearby temporary police tent.

She faces the possibility of seven days in jail — the stiffest sentence yet imposed for breaking the court injunction that forbids blocking access to the oil terminal or nearby tank farm. She is also the first arrestee since the Government of Canada recently announced it would purchase the pipeline from Kinder Morgan for 4.5 billion, with a plan to spend billions more to increase its capacity as a conduit for diluted bitumen (full disclosure: I was arrested on May 4th protesting the same project).

“It was my mother’s fault,” said Embree. “She always said to me that when you see something that needs doing it becomes your responsibility.”

Laurie Embree drove 400 kilometres from 108 Mile House to participate in the protest. She is a mother of four, a grandmother of three. Now retired, for many years she ran The Red Roof Bed and Breakfast. She also owned a 60-acre hay and cattle farm.

quote:

Ten kilometres from the Westridge gates, in the vastly different milieu of the Supreme Court of British Columbia, with its wood-grained walls and leather chairs, a drama has been playing out over the last month, as those who have been sentenced approach the judge to read aloud their reasons for defying the law.

Many begin by acknowledging that they are on unceded Coast Salish Territory. Most then say that though they respect Canada’s justice system, they have felt impelled to engage in civil disobedience in response to a higher code of ethics.

Anna Gerard, a woman in her twenties who traveled from Alberta, recently pled guilty and was sentenced to 240 hours of community service. “When our democratic rights and freedoms appear to fall second to an aggressive oil company, I believe that it is our duty to try to correct that balance,” she said in court.

Gillian Johnstone, an artist, mother and grandmother arrested with her husband and daughter on March 17th , made her court statement on June 6​th: “We are at a tipping point, perhaps beyond it... until society heeds the alarm bells, I feel a profound urgency to act against runaway climate change,” she said.

Today Briony Penn, a former federal candidate for the Liberal Party of Canada, and winner of the B.C. Book Prize, will make her statement to the Supreme Court of B.C., along with poet Murray Reiss, retired teacher Jean Wilkinson, United Church member and volunteer Tom Mitchell and others from Salt Spring Island. Yesterday Penn was among the cheering crowd at the Westridge Terminal supporting Laurie Embree.

“I think there are exceptional people in the world, and she’s one of them,” Penn said. “People like Laurie recognize that we are at a point of no return. They don’t care about their next trip to Disneyland. They care about the fate of the earth.”

“We’re not a spoiled little mob protesting – we’re a people who recognize that there is no other recourse.”

progressive17 progressive17's picture

Not all Christians see the Bible as a Book of Law. It was all replaced by "Love your neighbor as yourself". If everyone acted like that, no one would need law.

NDPP

Justin Trudeau Promised To Protect Indigenous Rights. He Lied. Again

https://t.co/eKuhM9VoeI

"One oil spill would destroy our territory. So much for the promise to respect Indigenous rights..."

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Pull Together – Stop Kinder Morgan

We’ve raised $625,000… and counting… to stop the Kinder Morgan pipeline.

The Kinder Morgan pipeline and tanker project does not have the consent of First Nations or of British Columbians. Whether it’s oil spills that can’t be cleaned up, orcas that will become extinct, bad economics that risk jobs, running roughshod over Indigenous rights, or increasing carbon emissions in the age of runaway climate change, an approval of this project is the wrong direction for our region and our world.

Opposition to Kinder Morgan includes 59 First Nations, 21 BC municipalities including Vancouver, North Vancouver, Victoria, and Burnaby and over 200,000 citizens who have signed petitions opposing the pipeline and tanker project.

Are you in?

Martin N.

Tamerlane promised to protect the vanquished if they surrendered. He lied. Again.

Whats your point? Does reality ever intrude on your altruism? Trudeau is an idiot, trading on his name to advance his personal ambitions. 

No one is ever going to give indigenous people anything unless they can either claw it back via churning policy and burning funding or by getting someone else to pay for it. Trudeau is just the latest iteration of political sleezeballs to do so.

It is a fact that expending any political capital on the hornets nest of indigenous politics beyond the usual chin wagging and group hugs is a recipe for political disaster.

Martin N.

epaulo13 wrote:

Pull Together – Stop Kinder Morgan

We’ve raised $625,000… and counting… to stop the Kinder Morgan pipeline.

The Kinder Morgan pipeline and tanker project does not have the consent of First Nations or of British Columbians. Whether it’s oil spills that can’t be cleaned up, orcas that will become extinct, bad economics that risk jobs, running roughshod over Indigenous rights, or increasing carbon emissions in the age of runaway climate change, an approval of this project is the wrong direction for our region and our world.

Opposition to Kinder Morgan includes 59 First Nations, 21 BC municipalities including Vancouver, North Vancouver, Victoria, and Burnaby and over 200,000 citizens who have signed petitions opposing the pipeline and tanker project.

Are you in?

Rather 'fluid' with the truth, n'est ce pas? Considering that even in the Lower Mainland, 50% are in favour. Interior BC residents are 60% in favour and overall, 54% of BC residents are in favour of TM being built.

Many FN are also in favour and state so publicly. Are you another old white guy appropriating indigenous voices to further your own agenda?

Truth be told, you and your supporters are in the minority and the forces of the majority are mobilizing against your deceit.

quizzical
quizzical
Martin N.

"Mario Canseco, president of Research Co., said the results show the “animosity” of Vancouverites over the deal but don’t conclusively determine whether those same people oppose the expansion of the existing pipeline."

This poll is interesting in that it show Vancouverites are in accord with Canadians generally about their displeasure that the Feds bought KM Canada but they also are mildly supportive of building the expansion. Although that support may be 'fluid'.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Canadian pipeline regulator's 'transparency' boss resigns following failed hunt for journalist's sources

An executive responsible for "transparency" at Canada's pipeline regulator, the National Energy Board, has resigned following an unsuccessful hunt for a reporter's sources.

Sylvain Bédard was hired in the summer of 2016 as executive vice-president of transparency and strategic engagement at the regulator.

He went on leave in the fall of 2017 following a series of incidents at the regulator. Among them was his decision to approve a sole-source contract to a private investigator to identify which employees had spoken to National Observer about internal decisions and actions by management at the regulator.

The contract cost $24,150 but Presidia failed to identify any of the sources in its final report.

quote:

The regulator awarded the contract to investigate its own staff to Ottawa-based firm Presidia Security Consulting in 2016 after employees told National Observer that the regulator's top bureaucrat, then-chief operating officer Josée Touchette, had joked at a staff meeting about arming them with tasers to face off with environmentalists.

Several months after awarding the contract, Bédard, who was responsible for overseeing the NEB's responses to access to information requests, sent an apology to staff after learning that Presidia's final report on its investigation was about to be released to National Observer in response to a freedom of information request.

quote:

Touchette has also recently left the regulator, accepting an executive job last fall at the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Touchette accepted this job after participating in a special network of international regulators, hosted by the OECD. The network received at least $200,000 in funding from the NEB, transferred through the federal Natural Resources Department, that was awarded based on advice provided by Touchette, National Observer reported last December.

quote:

Presidia, the firm that was investigating staff to identify National Observer's sources, was recently sold to a larger defence industry and engineering consulting firm, AGDA Group Consultants Inc. AGDA announced the purchase on April 3, 2018, one day before Bédard's official resignation.

The recent departure of the two NEB executives, Bédard and Touchette, comes as the regulator faces major upheaval due to new legislation in Parliament, Bill C-69, that proposes to shut down the NEB and replace it with a new Canadian Energy Regulator.

The legislation, expected to be adopted later in 2018, could force existing members of the board, political appointments made by the former Harper government, to step down and be replaced.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..some important info here. 16 min video.

Elizabeth May explains what's next

It's the end of a tumultuous session of Canadian politics in Ottawa.

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, on the front lines of the battle against the climate crisis, is taking some time to answer questions from National Observer about what has happened in recent months, and about what is coming next.

NDPP

Big Brother now hiring....

NEB Seeks Contractor To Monitor 'Vast Amounts' of Online Chatter For Political Security Threat

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/neb-secrecy-monitoring-services-c...

"The federal regulator responsible for pipelines is seeking an outside company to monitor online chatter en masse and aggregate the data in an effort to detect security risks ahead of time. The National Energy Board has issued a request for information (RFI) from companies qualified to 'provide real time capability to algorithically process vast amounts of traditional media, open source and public social media data..."

Trudeau's police state spies to protect Big Oil.

Martin N.

This is news. I thought Trudeau's police state was too busy carrying illegal migrants' bags across the border.

NDPP

"Canada, Kinder Morgan and AGs have long used Court as an instrument of colonial domination. Among other things they manipulate Judges into issuing rights-infringing Court Orders to bypass Aboriginal titles, rights, UNDRIP obligations, UN protections.

It is a travesty that the Trudeau government is moving to use such tactics in order to force through a pipeline that will transport dirty bitumen oil, from the world's most destructive extractive project, with some unbelievable claim that this will somehow allow Canada and the world to transition to a sustainable green economy."

https://twitter.com/ArticulateDinos/status/1009899238195646464

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

‘It’s appalling’: Greens, NDP oppose federal environmental assessment bill

Federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May and NDP deputy environment critic Linda Duncan shared a common response to the passage of Bill C-69 — which represented a change to modernize how projects such as pipelines, hydro dams and mines are reviewed — in the House of Commons on Wednesday.

In a word, they called it “appalling.”

“It was really undemocratic. It is a total missed opportunity,” said Duncan, who resigned from the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development over its handling of the bill.

“It was the most appalling process I’ve ever been through in my time in environmental law,” Duncan told The Narwhal in an interview. Duncan has worked in environmental law for 45 years.

The bill will replace the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency with the Impact Assessment Agency of Canada.

quote:

Canada’s environmental assessment laws have been criticized for being weaker than those in the U.S. and failing to consider the cumulative effects of projects, Canada’s international climate change commitments and the constitutional rights of Indigenous people.

These gaps have contributed to dysfunction in decision-making on major natural resource projects, leading to protests such as those around the Trans Mountain pipeline and the Site C dam.

“Over time, we have slid backwards,” Duncan said. “This was an opportunity to put in place — finally —  a strong federal impact assessment process and it’s a missed opportunity.”

Duncan noted the Liberals have not turned down a major project since taking power nearly three years ago. “And this law is not going to change that,” she said.

May said that before 2012, 4,000 to 5,000 projects a year were screened through the federal process each year. After Harper’s changes, that number was reduced to closer to 25.

“I don’t think that’s adequate,” May told The Narwhal. “Small projects not making the nightly news are sometimes the ones that need to be screened to make sure they’re not having a negative environmental impact.”

Bill C-69 doesn’t fix that problem, which May calls a “tragedy.”

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Some rare good climate news: the fossil fuel industry is weaker than ever

quote:

But from somewhat less likely quarters, there’s been reason this month for hope – reason, at least, to think that the basic trajectory of the world away from coal and gas and oil is firmly under way.

At the Vatican, the pope faced down a conference full of oil industry executives – the basic argument that fossil fuel reserves must be kept underground has apparently percolated to the top of the world’s biggest organization.

And from Wall Street came welcome word that market perceptions haven’t really changed: even in the age of Trump, the fossil fuel industry has gone from the world’s surest bet to an increasingly challenged enterprise. Researchers at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis minced no words: “In the past several years, oil industry financial statements have revealed significant signs of strain: Profits have dropped, cash flow is down, balance sheets are deteriorating and capital spending is falling. The stock market has recognized the sector’s overall weakness, punishing oil and gas shares over the past five years even as the market as a whole has soared.”

The IEEFA report labeled the industry “weaker than it has been in decades” and laid out its basic frailties, the first of which is paradoxical. Fracking has produced a sudden surge of gas and oil into the market, lowering prices – which means many older investments (Canada’s tar sands, for instance) no longer make economic sense. Fossil fuel has been transformed into a pure commodity business, and since the margins on fracking are narrow at best, its financial performance has been woeful. The IEEFA describes investors as “shell-shocked” by poor returns.

The second weakness is more obvious: the sudden rise of a competitor that seems able to deliver the same product – energy – with cheaper, cleaner, better technologies. Tesla, sure – but Volkswagen, having come clean about the dirtiness of diesel, is going to spend $84bn on electric drivetrains. China seems bent on converting its entire bus fleet to electric power. Every week seems to bring a new record-low price for clean energy: the most recent being a Nevada solar plant clocking in at 2.3 cents per kilowatt hour, even with Trump’s tariffs on Chinese panels.

Pages

Topic locked